Pure Music Player

Crimson · « **on:** 4 Mar 2010, 04:34 pm »

The makers of Pure Vinyl have released the playback-only portion of Pure Vinyl with all the original music server functionality (minus the upsampling which is supposed to be added soon). Currently on sale for $79 till the middle of the month, after which it will go to $99. A good deal if you ask me, as the playback portion of Pure Vinyl is quite good.

Pure Music Player

jaywills · « **Reply #1 on:** 4 Mar 2010, 06:01 pm »

Thanks, picked up a copy this morning. Still in beta, but site promises regular updates.

pardales · « **Reply #2 on:** 4 Mar 2010, 07:33 pm »

Does it work with iTunes (like Amarra) or is it more of a stand alone player? If it is standalone, how does it compare to iTunes?

Len_Dreyer · « **Reply #3 on:** 4 Mar 2010, 07:42 pm »

Pardales, here's the answer to your 1st question. It's a separate player but uses the iTunes database.

more info

pardales · « **Reply #4 on:** 4 Mar 2010, 09:40 pm »

Quote from: Len_Dreyer on 4 Mar 2010, 07:42 pm

Pardales, here's the answer to your 1st question. It's a separate player but uses the iTunes database.

more info

Thank you! I'll look forward to hearing others opinions of this player.

oneinthepipe · « **Reply #5 on:** 4 Mar 2010, 10:26 pm »

Just downloaded the demo. Sounds better than iTunes, IMO, which seems a little flat in comparison. Thanks for the information.

My HiFace should be here next week, and I am hoping to have a digital audio epiphany.

jaywills · « **Reply #6 on:** 5 Mar 2010, 12:28 am »

BTW, the software upsampler that is in Pure Vinyl has not been incorporated yet, but it is promised (in the Read Me) that it will be in the first non-beta iteration. Cordially,

oneinthepipe · « **Reply #7 on:** 5 Mar 2010, 01:17 pm »

Does anyone know Pure Vinyl's history of version upgrade charges? I wonder what the costs will be for the upgrade to the non-beta version and subsequent updates and upgrades.

bunnyma357 · « **Reply #8 on:** 5 Mar 2010, 01:36 pm »

Quote from: oneinthepipe on 5 Mar 2010, 01:17 pm

Does anyone know Pure Vinyl's history of version upgrade charges? I wonder what the costs will be for the upgrade to the non-beta version and subsequent updates and upgrades.

I'm pretty sure they haven't charged for an upgrade of Pure Vinyl yet. From their site:

"The final version of Pure Vinyl 3 will be a no-cost upgrade, the same as with all previous Pure Vinyl upgrades."

http://www.channld.com/pure-vinyl_download.html

Jim C

Crimson · « **Reply #9 on:** 5 Mar 2010, 02:25 pm »

Overall a great product (sound-wise) at a great price (even for Pure Vinyl) with great support. An added plus is no additional plug-ins are required for remote volume control via an iPhone/iPod Touch as it tracks iTunes' volume level without having to deal with the iTunes playback 'ghost'. Also, with a click of a button you can try memory playback and (soon-to be added) up-sampling.

jtwrace · « **Reply #10 on:** 5 Mar 2010, 02:30 pm »

How does it sound compared to Amarra?

ted_b · « **Reply #11 on:** 5 Mar 2010, 03:33 pm »

As much as I like it and like Rob's customer support, it continues, like its PureVinyl big brother, to have issues with sample rate changes with my Weiss DAC2. It will semi-randomly hang on a change (usually the second or third sample rate change), thus rendering it unplayable until I reboot the app. Amarra, OTOH, handles sample rate changes flawlessly. Not comparing sonics, just functionality.

oneinthepipe · « **Reply #12 on:** 5 Mar 2010, 11:10 pm »

Quote from: ted_b on 5 Mar 2010, 03:33 pm

As much as I like it and like Rob's customer support, it continues, like its PureVinyl big brother, to have issues with sample rate changes with my Weiss DAC2. It will semi-randomly hang on a change (usually the second or third sample rate change), thus rendering it unplayable until I reboot the app. Amarra, OTOH, handles sample rate changes flawlessly. Not comparing sonics, just functionality.

ted_b:

How do the sonics compare, if you have an opinion?

ted_b · « **Reply #13 on:** 6 Mar 2010, 06:58 pm »

Quote from: oneinthepipe on 5 Mar 2010, 11:10 pm

ted_b:

How do the sonics compare, if you have an opinion?

Well, good question. I haven't implemented memory playback in PM so my comparisons are PM/iTunes in normal mode vs Amarra/iTunes reniced and in RAMDISK. PM seems to have a clearer presentation, with better microdetail and better instrument separation. Amarra seems to have more body and texture, as if listening with a mild "loudness" contour engaged. They each sound great (wayyyy better than standard iTunes) and as is typical in this hobby, each provide some aspects that I'd love the other to have. As far as value, a no brainer for PM at $79. I'm hoping I can work through the auto sample rate issues with Rob.

skunark · « **Reply #14 on:** 6 Mar 2010, 08:21 pm »

It just seems like a sin that any mac/pc music player would modify the digital bits before shipping them out to toslink port or even a usb port. What exactly is PM doing here? I do know that iTunes or any other media players won't adjust the built-in toslink settings from 44/16 to 96/24 when you change between different fidelity sources nor would I expect it to adjust the dozen or so USB dacs between 44/16 and 48/24. It's just the nature of the OSes and the Applications that run on it, it's far from perfect.

I would expect the goal here is to reliably provide the source unmodified to a dac whether it's via a file or s/pdif. Any imaging or sound improvements would then be on the analog side of the dac.

ted_b · « **Reply #15 on:** 6 Mar 2010, 08:25 pm »

Quote from: skunark on 6 Mar 2010, 08:21 pm

It just seems like a sin that any mac/pc music player would modify the digital bits before shipping them out to toslink port or even a usb port. What exactly is PM doing here? I do know that iTunes or any other media players won't adjust the built-in toslink settings from 44/16 to 96/24 when you change between different fidelity sources nor would I expect it to adjust the dozen or so USB dacs between 44/16 and 48/24. It's just the nature of the OSes and the Applications that run on it, it's far from perfect.

I would expect the goal here is to reliably provide the source unmodified to a dac whether it's via a file or s/pdif. Any imaging or sound improvements would then be on the analog side of the dac.

No one said they're not bit-perfect. Why the assumption?? All music players sound different from one another, and we've been noodling why for some time. Just like most transports (cd player digital out to DAC) sound different, but are delivering the same hopefully bit-perfect data.

And auto sample rate adjustments are welcomed!! iTunes doesn't do it but Amarra, PV, PM and many other apps do. They simply adjust Audio Midi (for Mac example) to the new native bit depth/sample rate of the particular song or album, rather than having to do it manually. With more and more of my collection at 24/96 and above it's a wonderfully convenient thing

Crimson · « **Reply #16 on:** 6 Mar 2010, 09:39 pm »

Quote from: oneinthepipe on 5 Mar 2010, 11:10 pm

ted_b:

How do the sonics compare, if you have an opinion?

I wrote a brief comparison (with PV):
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=76571.0

pardales · « **Reply #17 on:** 7 Mar 2010, 12:14 am »

Quote from: Crimson on 4 Mar 2010, 04:34 pm

The makers of Pure Vinyl have released the playback-only portion of Pure Vinyl with all the original music server functionality (minus the upsampling which is supposed to be added soon). Currently on sale for $79 till the middle of the month, after which it will go to $99. A good deal if you ask me, as the playback portion of Pure Vinyl is quite good.

Pure Music Player

I couldn't find this promotion on the website. Is it already over? I am running the demo right now.

ted_b · « **Reply #18 on:** 7 Mar 2010, 01:22 am »

Half way down the download/demo page there is a large wide grey bar with the promo
http://www.pure-music-player.com/

HeadphoneAddict · « **Reply #19 on:** 19 Mar 2010, 05:15 am »

Crap, it's $129 now.

(and it took me 25 months of lurking before my first post...)